ElCapitan

foggyhill said:

ElCapitan said:

Mike Wuerthele said:

riverko said:

Back to days of iPod HP?

From what we can tell, this is more business-to-business, and not about hardware production. Nearly all software.

Let's hope it works better than the early Apple - IBM alliance where as Guy Kawasaki so right fully put it:

"Management supported it, but the tech guys hated each other's technology so it failed completely".  

– and before you start protesting, as Motorola took on a lesser role in supplying Apple with PowerPC processors, also that failed in the end as IBM had little to no interest in consumer oriented processors. 

I'm guessing you have a recent link that supports your BS about the IBM alliance, come on, should be easy since you are so full of confidence.

foggyhill said:

ElCapitan said:

Mike Wuerthele said:

riverko said:

Back to days of iPod HP?

From what we can tell, this is more business-to-business, and not about hardware production. Nearly all software.

Let's hope it works better than the early Apple - IBM alliance where as Guy Kawasaki so right fully put it:

"Management supported it, but the tech guys hated each other's technology so it failed completely".  

– and before you start protesting, as Motorola took on a lesser role in supplying Apple with PowerPC processors, also that failed in the end as IBM had little to no interest in consumer oriented processors. 

I'm guessing you have a recent link that supports your BS about the IBM alliance, come on, should be easy since you are so full of confidence.

StrangeDays said:

ElCapitan said:

Mike Wuerthele said:

riverko said:

Back to days of iPod HP?

From what we can tell, this is more business-to-business, and not about hardware production. Nearly all software.

Let's hope it works better than the early Apple - IBM alliance where as Guy Kawasaki so right fully put it:

"Management supported it, but the tech guys hated each other's technology so it failed completely".  

– and before you start protesting, as Motorola took on a lesser role in supplying Apple with PowerPC processors, also that failed in the end as IBM had little to no interest in consumer oriented processors. 

How about as well as the current Apple-IBM enterprise alliance, which has no such reports?

Mike Wuerthele said:

riverko said:

Back to days of iPod HP?

From what we can tell, this is more business-to-business, and not about hardware production. Nearly all software.

nht said:

ElCapitan said:

nht said:

ElCapitan said:

nht said:

ElCapitan said:

corrections said:

ElCapitan said:

>However, Apple hasn't been actively pushing Macs at Windows users lately. Actually Apple hasn't been actively pushing Macs at a rather large group of existing Mac users either.
Mini, Mac Pro and to some extent MacBook Pro users have been neglected, pushed out in the cold for years. Add to them macOS Server users, and with the deprecation of OpenGL, an entire class of high end graphics and scientific users from whom the ability of running iOS apps is virtually irrelevant.

Yes.
The installed base of Mac users is ~150M. 
The installed base of iOS users is ~1,150M

The media narrative that Apple isn't updating Macs 

Media narrative? - What planet are you living on?

Besides ALL the iOS users are 100% dependent on Macs.

Not a single app is created without a Mac. 

NOT catering to the developer community who creates and maintains those apps is over time cutting the branch you sit on. 

NOT catering to the IT professionals running the backends and infrastructures for those devices in everything from small businesses to large enterprises  is over time cutting the branch you sit on.

As a dev I can heartily say you’re full of it.

Docker works fine on my 2016 MBP.  XCode works great. Swift is very nice.  

If you don’t need mobility then the MBP isn’t designed for you.  Buy an iMac.  If you do need mobility (as in you actually travel) the current MBPs are better than the older ones.

And with eGPUs you can have both power and mobility, although at slightly higher cost than just an iMac.

Docker works depending on what you want to run on it. One example is UNMS - Ubiquiti Network Management System they cannot get to work reliably in Docker for macOS.  Besides if you really want to use Docker for anything but hobby and some testing there are virtually no hardware from Apple any more that makes sense to deploy it on. 

No, the 2016 MBP is not designed for me. For lengthy Xcode builds that routinely takes 50 minutes with all cores active, due to the thermals of the 2016 MBP it starts throttling a few minutes into the build. - NOT GOOD!  

Even for testing the application stability on that hardware that many users may end up with (for any reason), the GPU also starts throttling after a few minutes. So it is useless. 

International pricing is also an issue when a moderately configured 2016 MBP 15" set you back over $3700, that is also not very good. 

In addition there are 4 minis in a setup to properly test the software (backend for multiple clients), and they all are looking long in the tooth since new i7 minis cannot be had. The ability to run multiple processes at full load is much more important than absolute processor speed. 

1) You don’t deploy production docker instances on Macs.  You develop on Macs and deploy on production servers.  That’s one major reason to use Docker in the first place...so the transition from dev to ops environment is lower.

2) While Docker For Mac runs on hyperkit, Docker toolbox uses virtual box and UNMS should have no issues.

3) Unless you are consistently doing 50 min builds on an airplane or hotel room you should have bought an iMac.  What are you building that takes 50 mins anyway?  Why isn’t this being done on your CI server?  XCode 9 now has XCode server built in.  

4) If your backend is dockerized then you can test on AWS. WTF would you use Docker and then lock yourself to testing on Mac mini’s?

5) https://eshop.macsales.com/item/Apple/GA4GS3HXXX0XI/

$1750 4 core Mac Pro.  International Shipping to Europe and maybe some other countries (dunno where you are).  Apple refurbished with 1 year Apple Warranty...maybe.

1. No I don't.

If you happened to pay attention I said i7 minis in the test environment. – You know the species that went extinct around 2012 only to be spotted on eBay since. A species that existed even before Docker for macOS even was a remote possibility. So neither test nor production is dockerized (and even if it can be, it will just need more memory and resources overall.)

Also it used to be that businesses could deploy their production to Apple hardware. It could even be racked alongside the other production servers. 

With the removal of anything server from Apple's portfolio, I suppose you could always put a bunch of iPad Pro's in a nice rack enclose and use them as "blade servers". </sarc>

2-5. You just confirmed what I said, Apple's most Pro portable cannot be used as a developer machine if you throw at it lengthy builds. – You have to have an iMac, and a CI server with Xcode 9. God forbid being a developer who move between offices, meeting rooms and clients all day, who work in an environment where you don't have a fixed desk, who demo solutions or discuss ideas at client locations. - NO, you have to have an iMac!

The 4 core Mac Pro - seriously?? 2013 tech?  This config? has 75% of the memory I have in my MBP, 1/4 of the SSD storage. Not a single user of the app will have this machine, so it isn't even a valid test config. 

And what's with the building that takes 50 minutes anyway.  - You're winning there too because this baby will soon go away like every other solution using OpenGL. Problem solved! Another of those pesky Mac users gone...

I guess I am holding my iPhone wrong too.

Another “expert” unwilling to use modern workflows and prefer to do it the 2008 way.

1) if you don’t use modern dev ops then too bad for you.  The back end stuff can and should run anywhere.  Testing on minis is stupid.  The minor resource cost penalty for Docker is well worth the savings in deployment.  Deploying in the cloud is a lot better than self managed xserves.

2) you don’t rebuild demos at the client site and certainly not for 50 mins. If you are a dumbshit crippling your devs to work on a 15” screens on a regular basis you deserve what you get.  That’s ignoring that in an office environment you should have fast networking and able to hit your ci servers to rebuild as needed.  And 50 min rebuild time implies you are using your build system wrong whatever it is and your dependency graphs are completely hosed.

At the startup I was at the primary devs had high end iMacs with a second 4K display because that was just a lot more productive than working with just a laptop.  There were demo laptops to use at client sites.  Only devs that regularly developed at client sites had MBP and often it was easier to just fedex an iMac to the client site than carry a huge desktop replacement laptop like the Dell Precision around.

3) you use the Mac pros as inexpensive CI machines moron and you can add as much memory and storage as needed.  It’s cheap and fast and 2013 or not those machines work well.

4) if you are so stupid you are unable to deploy your app with Vulkan over the next few YEARS before OpenGL is removed (if ever) you deserve to be left behind

Whether you use Macs or PCs running Windows or Linux makes no difference. You’re doing things in a stupid way.  Devs needs screens and work spaces that don’t suck.  Preferably quiet workspaces so they can actually code and not “cool open concept” and shared  spaces where it is hard to concentrate.  They are more productive with modern workflows, tools and first class devops support.  Testing can and should be done with automated regression tests as part of your CI builds and system testing done on target platforms and not minis.